Climate risks dwarf Europe's energy crisis, space chief warns

[Fred Bloggs]

"The head of the European Space Agency (ESA) has warned economic damage from heatwaves and drought could dwarf Europe's energy crisis as he called for urgent action to tackle climate change."

https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/climate-risks-dwarf-europes-energy-crisis-space-chief-warns-2022-08-11/

[Bob Engelhardt]

On 8/12/2022 7:25 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> "[...] he called for urgent action to tackle climate change."
>[...]
His urgent action needed is to develop a 2nd generation of satellite
monitors. Akin to appointing a committee to look into it.

At any rate, it's too late: we're past the tipping point and it's out of
our hands.

[Anthony William Sloman]

Which tipping point would that be? The one where the extra costs imposed spending on climate change denial propaganda makes buying fossil fuels impossibly expensive?

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[John Larkin]

Excellent. We can stop worrying and whining and enjoy the rest of our
short lives.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc trk

The cork popped merrily, and Lord Peter rose to his feet.
"Bunter", he said, "I give you a toast. The triumph of Instinct over Reason"

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 12:30:05 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 09:58:51 -0400, Bob Engelhardt
> <BobEng...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >On 8/12/2022 7:25 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> >> "[...] he called for urgent action to tackle climate change."
> >>[...]
> >His urgent action needed is to develop a 2nd generation of satellite
> >monitors. Akin to appointing a committee to look into it.
> >
> >At any rate, it's too late: we're past the tipping point and it's out of
> >our hands.
>
> Excellent. We can stop worrying and whining and enjoy the rest of our short lives.

John Larkin is fond of irrational excuses for doing nothing.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Fred Bloggs]

They still have the geoengineering option-.It's more than just the survival of mankind, it's the entire biosphere that must be saved because mankind can't live without it.
This write-up is pretty good:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_engineering
American Meteorological Society:
https://www.ametsoc.org/index.cfm/ams/about-ams/ams-statements/archive-statements-of-the-ams/geoengineering-the-climate-system/
and this:
https://geoengineering.global/#:~:text=What%20is%20Geoengineering%3F,on%20our%20civilization%20and%20biosphere.

[whit3rd]

On Friday, August 12, 2022 at 7:12:41 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Friday, August 12, 2022 at 11:58:58 PM UTC+10, bobenge...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On 8/12/2022 7:25 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > "[...] he called for urgent action to tackle climate change."

> > At any rate, it's too late: we're past the tipping point and it's out of
> > our hands.

> Which tipping point would that be? The one where the extra costs imposed spending on climate change denial propaganda makes buying fossil fuels impossibly expensive?

No, the point where water and food (which are NEEDS) become excessively expensive unless
we all diminish fossil fuel pollution (which is a want, not a need).

[Anthony William Sloman]

Actually the usual meaning of "tipping point" in this context is where global warming has gone far enough to generate enough environmental change that global warming would keep on getting worse even if we managed to reduce atmospheric CO2 levels below 270 ppm.

When the Arctic sea ice finally goes away and the Arctic Ocean stays ice-free all the year round the albedo of that region will go up quite a bit - that kind of thing. It's talking about an irreversible result.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[corvid]

On 8/13/22 03:49, Anthony William Sloman wrote:

>
> When the Arctic sea ice finally goes away and the Arctic Ocean stays
> ice-free all the year round the albedo of that region will go up
> quite a bit - that kind of thing. It's talking about an irreversible
> result.

If the Russian navy will paint all of their decks white, that could help.

[John Larkin]

The Black Sea is actually white, because we never emerged from the
last irreversible ice age.

[whit3rd]

Help what? Target acquisition?

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 10:43:30 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Friday, August 12, 2022 at 9:58:58 AM UTC-4, bobenge...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On 8/12/2022 7:25 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>> > "[...] he called for urgent action to tackle climate change."
>> >[...]
>> His urgent action needed is to develop a 2nd generation of satellite
>> monitors. Akin to appointing a committee to look into it.
>>
>> At any rate, it's too late: we're past the tipping point and it's out of
>> our hands.
>
>They still have the geoengineering option-.It's more than just the survival of mankind, it's the entire biosphere that must be saved because mankind can't live without it.

Have you been outside lately? It's green and beautiful.

[Anthony William Sloman]

We have been alternating between ice ages and interglacials roughly every 100,000 years for the last past few million years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age

If this was intended to be a joke, it was a remarkably ill-informed one

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Anthony William Sloman]

Some places may stay that way.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[whit3rd]

'the entire biosphere' isn't represented by a wind-from-the-ocean coastal site.
Po river valley, and the Rhine, aren't looking 'green and beautiful'
just now.

[Robert Latest]

Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> Actually the usual meaning of "tipping point" in this context is where global
> warming has gone far enough to generate enough environmental change that
> global warming would keep on getting worse even if we managed to reduce
> atmospheric CO2 levels below 270 ppm.
>
> When the Arctic sea ice finally goes away and the Arctic Ocean stays ice-free
> all the year round the albedo of that region will go up quite a bit - that
> kind of thing. It's talking about an irreversible result.

"Irreversible" in this context means: within the time frame of the existence of
the human species, or human civilization as we know it. Which is maybe
thousands of years (species) or decades (civilization). Earth has been swinging
back and forth between more extreme conditions, but each time with what amounts
to a complete overhaul of the biosphere. Pockets of humans may survive such
swings in some parts of the world, but not under conditions that I want to.

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (14 Aug 2022 09:50:34 GMT) it happened Robert Latest
<bobl...@yahoo.com> wrote in <jlrur9...@mid.individual.net>:

We have technology these day to help us survive.
That is if the green idiots did not kill all power generating methods by then.
<nuclear, coal, oil, what have you>
Else a big setback for humans..

[Anthony William Sloman]

The "green idiots" seem perfectly happy with solar cells and windmills, which do happen to provide electric power more cheaply than any of the sources you list. You need to throw in quite a bit of grid storage to cope with the fact that the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow all the time, but that's just even more additional investment that cheapskate groups don't want to pay for.

> Else a big setback for humans..

Screwing up the climate by dumping a lot of CO2 in the atmosphere is shaping up as a pretty big setback for humanity. There are a bunchy of sub-human idiots who don't seem to be up to getting the message, and want to make the set-back even worse.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Jan Panteltje]

Billy The CO2 Kid screamed:

>The "green idiots" seem perfectly happy with solar cells and windmills, which
>do happen to provide electric power more cheaply than any of the sources
>you list. You need to throw in quite a bit of grid storage to cope with the
>fact that the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow all the time, but
>that's just even more additional investment that cheapskate groups don't
>want to pay for.

We have currently no way to store that much energy,
the climate and weather will create periods without sun (volcanic eruptions)
and windmills will fly apart in decent storms
It is all about redundancy
The electric grid will break down again and again as it always does,
the solar panels will be blown of the roofs and land as happened many times.
Decent hail storms will put holes in those too.
No electricity and all transport electric means no emergency services in those situations
Greens have no clue, they have been brainwashed, a whole generation, by Al Gore and his polar bear club.
and now destroy everything.
Logic reasoning they are not capable of.. isolating homes here in the Netherlands
and taking those of the gas, claiming it is needed because of CO2 and glowballworming like you do,
but forgetting at the same time to put in aircos!!!!!
How incredible stupid can you get >>> warming >>> needs >>> cooling

>Screwing up the climate by dumping a lot of CO2 in the atmosphere is shaping
>up as a pretty big setback for humanity.

CO2 has nothing much to do with it,
you are clearly not willing to look up CO2 versus warm and cold periods in the past
Neither has reading up on earth orbit related cycles did anything to your misunderstandings
http://old.world-mysteries.com/alignments/mpl_al3b.htm

>There are a bunchy of sub-human idiots
>who don't seem to be up to getting the message, and want to make the
>set-back even worse.

Well, you flying down under in that CO2 emitting jet is that what you meant???

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

On Sat, 13 Aug 2022 23:14:56 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Weather happens "just now".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Thomas_Wyke-_Thames_frost_fair.JPG

And not very long ago Michigan was under a mile of ice.

But irrational fear, and profiteering from same, gets even deeper.

Be as afraid as you enjoy. Stay under your bed and leave more hiking
trails for us.

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

On 14 Aug 2022 09:50:34 GMT, Robert Latest <bobl...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

How did earth ever emerge from irreversible ice-age albedo feedback?

Emotional guessing about control theory doesn't work. Positive
feedback doesn't necessarily latch, but most people think it does.

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Sunday, August 14, 2022 at 11:45:50 PM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Aug 2022 23:14:56 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 4:58:18 PM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >> On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 10:43:30 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
> >> <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> >They still have the geoengineering option-.It's more than just the survival of mankind, it's the entire biosphere that must be saved because mankind can't live without it.
> >
> >> Have you been outside lately? It's green and beautiful.
> >
> >'the entire biosphere' isn't represented by a wind-from-the-ocean coastal site.
> >Po river valley, and the Rhine, aren't looking 'green and beautiful'
> >just now.
>
> Weather happens "just now".

Climate is long term average of "just nows". Longer than your attention span.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Thomas_Wyke-_Thames_frost_fair.JPG

1683-84 - not "just now".

> And not very long ago Michigan was under a mile of ice.

Through most of the most recent ice age, which ended more than ten thousand years ago . Climate scientist have a pretty exact idea of how and why, but you don't.

> But irrational fear, and profiteering from same, gets even deeper.

Anything John Larkin can't understand is "irrational". He want to rationalise stuff for himself, but he's not that good at doing it and he doesn't know anything like enough to do it properly, even if he had the capacity to do it at all.

> Be as afraid as you enjoy. Stay under your bed and leave more hiking trails for us.

If they haven't got burnt out by the most recent forest fires. Nobody enjoys being afraid, but having the capacity to appreciate that things can go wrong is what saves some of us from being foolhardy and worse.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Sunday, August 14, 2022 at 11:50:49 PM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On 14 Aug 2022 09:50:34 GMT, Robert Latest <bobl...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> >> Actually the usual meaning of "tipping point" in this context is where global
> >> warming has gone far enough to generate enough environmental change that
> >> global warming would keep on getting worse even if we managed to reduce
> >> atmospheric CO2 levels below 270 ppm.
> >>
> >> When the Arctic sea ice finally goes away and the Arctic Ocean stays ice-free
> >> all the year round the albedo of that region will go up quite a bit - that
> >> kind of thing. It's talking about an irreversible result.
> >
> >"Irreversible" in this context means: within the time frame of the existence of
> >the human species, or human civilization as we know it. Which is maybe
> >thousands of years (species) or decades (civilization). Earth has been swinging
> >back and forth between more extreme conditions, but each time with what amounts
> >to a complete overhaul of the biosphere. Pockets of humans may survive such
> >swings in some parts of the world, but not under conditions that I want to.
>
> How did earth ever emerge from irreversible ice-age albedo feedback?

And kept on doing it so we can see Milankovitch cycles between ice age and interglacials with a roughly 100,000 year period.
Climate scientist have worked this out in quite a lot of detail. Anthony Watts isn't one, so he won't tell you about it.

> Emotional guessing about control theory doesn't work.

Even if it seems to work for you

> Positive feedback doesn't necessarily latch, but most people think it does.

So what. Most people get lots of stuff wrong. You can use a little bit of it to get better linearity out of a platinum resistance temperature sensor.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[whit3rd]

On Sunday, August 14, 2022 at 6:45:50 AM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Aug 2022 23:14:56 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 4:58:18 PM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

> >> Have you been outside lately? It's green and beautiful.

> >'the entire biosphere' isn't represented by a wind-from-the-ocean coastal site.
> >Po river valley, and the Rhine, aren't looking 'green and beautiful'
> >just now.

> Weather happens "just now".

Well, yeah; that's why weather is reported on site-by-site basis, with dates and times.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Thomas_Wyke-_Thames_frost_fair.JPG
>
> And not very long ago Michigan was under a mile of ice.

In human terms, it WAS very long ago. What's your point?

> But irrational fear, and profiteering from same, gets even deeper.

Non sequitur. There's no irrationality or profiteering in your rants, nor in mine.

[rbowman]

If the genetic Just So Stories can be believed, my ancestors chased the
glaciers north after the last ice age and made a living hunting and
gathering. They obviously survived although it might have been touch and
go when the damn farmers arrived.

[rbowman]

On 08/14/2022 07:45 AM, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Aug 2022 23:14:56 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 4:58:18 PM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>> On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 10:43:30 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
>>> <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> They still have the geoengineering option-.It's more than just the survival of mankind, it's the entire biosphere that must be saved because mankind can't live without it.
>>
>>> Have you been outside lately? It's green and beautiful.
>>
>> 'the entire biosphere' isn't represented by a wind-from-the-ocean coastal site.
>> Po river valley, and the Rhine, aren't looking 'green and beautiful'
>> just now.
>
> Weather happens "just now".
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Thomas_Wyke-_Thames_frost_fair.JPG
>
> And not very long ago Michigan was under a mile of ice.

https://www.glaciallakemissoula.org/

I have a photo I took from one of the mountains one Thanksgiving. The
valley suffers from temperature inversions and while it was bright and
sunny at 5800', the valley was covered with an unbroken mass of white
clouds a couple of hundred feet down the trail. Looking out over the
clouds with only the mountains showing it was close to a sunny day at
Lake Missoula 12,000 years ago.

Several of the trails have makers at 4200', 1200' above the valley floor.

[Robert Latest]

Jan Panteltje wrote:
> On a sunny day (14 Aug 2022 09:50:34 GMT) it happened Robert Latest
><bobl...@yahoo.com> wrote in <jlrur9...@mid.individual.net>:
>
>>Anthony William Sloman wrote:
>>> When the Arctic sea ice finally goes away and the Arctic Ocean stays
>>> ice-free all the year round the albedo of that region will go up quite a
>>> bit - that kind of thing. It's talking about an irreversible result.
>>
>>"Irreversible" in this context means: within the time frame of the existence
>>of the human species, or human civilization as we know it. Which is maybe
>>thousands of years (species) or decades (civilization). Earth has been
>>swinging back and forth between more extreme conditions, but each time with
>>what amounts to a complete overhaul of the biosphere. Pockets of humans may
>>survive such swings in some parts of the world, but not under conditions that
>>I want to.
>
> We have technology these day to help us survive.

Those will be the "pockets" of survival that I meant. No technology will be
able to sustain several billions of humans under conditions that might be
classified as "human." This is not about long-term biological survival of a
species, I'm not too worried about that. I'm worried about the civilization(s)
that makes all the difference for this particlular species, and which
incidentally is the foundation of the very technology that you think will help

us survive.

> That is if the green idiots did not kill all power generating methods by then.
><nuclear, coal, oil, what have you>

All limited resources, even if you ignore environmental impact. Long-term
energy generation can only use sunlight. What is your proposal?

[Robert Latest]

Jan Panteltje wrote:
> We have currently no way to store that much energy,

We don't need to. We need more flexible strategies for energy *consumption*.
Everything nowadays is still based on the "base load + peak load" paradigm.

> the climate and weather will create periods without sun (volcanic eruptions)

Not everywhere at the same time.

> and windmills will fly apart in decent storms

They don't today, why should they in the future?

> It is all about redundancy

Correct.

> The electric grid will break down again and again as it always does,

If constructed cheaply wnd without regulatory oversight like in Texas, yes.

> the solar panels will be blown of the roofs and land as happened many times.

If constructed cheaply wnd without regulatory oversight like in Texas, yes.

> How incredible stupid can you get >>> warming >>> needs >>> cooling

Powered >>> by >>> energy >>> that >>> generates >>> more >>> warming,
according to your ideas. Tell you what: Cooling is only needed when the sun
shines. No electric energy storage necessary. Why not just slap solar cells
onto those sprawling cardboard shacks that Arizonians call "single family
homes" and keep them cooled to 60°F all day. It could be so easy. You don't
even need a thermostat.

[Robert Latest]

jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>"Irreversible" in this context means: within the time frame of the existence
>>of the human species, or human civilization as we know it. Which is maybe
>>thousands of years (species) or decades (civilization). Earth has been
>>swinging back and forth between more extreme conditions, but each time with
>>what amounts to a complete overhaul of the biosphere. Pockets of humans may
>>survive such swings in some parts of the world, but not under conditions that
>>I want to.
>
> How did earth ever emerge from irreversible ice-age albedo feedback?

I don't know how it happened, except that it happened on a time scale that was
too slow for most complex species to wait out.

> Emotional guessing about control theory doesn't work.

As somebody who claims to know about control theory you are familiar with time
constants associated with feedback loops, and if the time constant is orders of
magnitude too large for the task at hand the controller is worthless. The fact
that your mains supply is controlled to deliver 60*3600*24 cycles per day
doesn't make it suitable for a high-accuracy reference clock on a time scale of
less than a day.

> Positive feedback doesn't necessarily latch, but most people think it does.

If positive feedback goes on for long enough you can consider it latched for
all practical purposes. If we knew for a fact that without any CO2 limit the
average temperatures would peak at +6°C in 200 years and be back at today's
level in another 200 it should not make a difference for today's decision
making at all.

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 7:19:51 PM UTC+10, Robert Latest wrote:
> Jan Panteltje wrote:
> > On a sunny day (14 Aug 2022 09:50:34 GMT) it happened Robert Latest
> ><bobl...@yahoo.com> wrote in <jlrur9...@mid.individual.net>:
> >
> >>Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> >>> When the Arctic sea ice finally goes away and the Arctic Ocean stays
> >>> ice-free all the year round the albedo of that region will go up quite a
> >>> bit - that kind of thing. It's talking about an irreversible result.
> >>
> >>"Irreversible" in this context means: within the time frame of the existence
> >>of the human species, or human civilization as we know it. Which is maybe
> >>thousands of years (species) or decades (civilization). Earth has been
> >>swinging back and forth between more extreme conditions, but each time with
> >>what amounts to a complete overhaul of the biosphere. Pockets of humans may
> >>survive such swings in some parts of the world, but not under conditions that
> >>I want to.
> >
> > We have technology these day to help us survive.
>
> Those will be the "pockets" of survival that I meant. No technology will be
> able to sustain several billions of humans under conditions that might be
> classified as "human."

That's nonsense. You just have to move your population further away from the equator.

> This is not about long-term biological survival of a species, I'm not too worried about that.
> I'm worried about the civilization(s) that makes all the difference for this particlular species, and which incidentally is the foundation of the very technology that you think will help us survive.

So a high technology energy intensive civilisation, which could run fine on solar cells, wind turbines and grid storage to cover the gaps when the sun isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing. It wouldn't run quite the same as the current arrangements, but it could be close enough

> > That is if the green idiots did not kill all power generating methods by then.
> ><nuclear, coal, oil, what have you>
>
> All limited resources, even if you ignore environmental impact. Long-term
> energy generation can only use sunlight. What is your proposal?

He hasn't got one. He's just recycling climate change denial propaganda pushed out by the fossil fuel extraction industry. It doesn't make a lot of sense, but it doesn't have to to appeal to Jan Panteltje and John Larkin.

> > Else a big setback for humans..

As if Jan could speak for actual rational humans.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (15 Aug 2022 09:19:43 GMT) it happened Robert Latest
<bobl...@yahoo.com> wrote in <jluhdf...@mid.individual.net>:

>Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> On a sunny day (14 Aug 2022 09:50:34 GMT) it happened Robert Latest
>><bobl...@yahoo.com> wrote in <jlrur9...@mid.individual.net>:
>>
>>>Anthony William Sloman wrote:
>>>> When the Arctic sea ice finally goes away and the Arctic Ocean stays
>>>> ice-free all the year round the albedo of that region will go up quite a
>>>> bit - that kind of thing. It's talking about an irreversible result.
>>>
>>>"Irreversible" in this context means: within the time frame of the existence
>>>of the human species, or human civilization as we know it. Which is maybe
>>>thousands of years (species) or decades (civilization). Earth has been
>>>swinging back and forth between more extreme conditions, but each time with
>>>what amounts to a complete overhaul of the biosphere. Pockets of humans may
>>>survive such swings in some parts of the world, but not under conditions that
>>>I want to.
>>
>> We have technology these day to help us survive.
>
>Those will be the "pockets" of survival that I meant. No technology will be
>able to sustain several billions of humans under conditions that might be
>classified as "human."

Much the situation already, say Africa
while we eat our stomach full, many there have no food,

>This is not about long-term biological survival of a
>species, I'm not too worried about that. I'm worried about the civilization(s)

Sure, US will go the same way as the Aztecs etc
Statute Of Glibbery will be dug up by the archaeologists like we now look at those pyramids in Mexico
Eskimos will have nice orange fruit gardens where now is the arctic...

>that makes all the difference for this particlular species, and which
>incidentally is the foundation of the very technology that you think will help
>us survive.
>
>> That is if the green idiots did not kill all power generating methods by then.
>><nuclear, coal, oil, what have you>
>
>All limited resources, even if you ignore environmental impact. Long-term
>energy generation can only use sunlight. What is your proposal?

Well fusion energy is only - and was only 30 years into the future ;-)

Maybe underground buildings and nuclear power .. few hundred years ago nobody
could imagine todays technology..

We WILL have to look for other planets / moons of our planets, other solar systems
but us, being [just] a chemical reaction, life omnipresent in what we call universe
makes us not so important, [we] just a transient ..

Maybe Musk will sell SpaceX shares next to pay for Twitter and then with the way NASA
proceeds few ice-ages may pass before US jumps to space.

Good chance China will have nice Chinese restaurants on Mars by the time the first US astronuts make it there.

What 'system' is better? Or will it be everybody for themselves?
Mass migration will happen, already happens..
Maybe the countries and systems will unite if it get really critical
Kissinger on
https://www.rt.com/news/560780-henry-kissinger-ukraine-taiwan/

I think we can do it, how many generations it will take?

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 7:49:38 PM UTC+10, Robert Latest wrote:
> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >>"Irreversible" in this context means: within the time frame of the existence
> >>of the human species, or human civilization as we know it. Which is maybe
> >>thousands of years (species) or decades (civilization). Earth has been
> >>swinging back and forth between more extreme conditions, but each time with
> >>what amounts to a complete overhaul of the biosphere. Pockets of humans may
> >>survive such swings in some parts of the world, but not under conditions that
> >>I want to.
> >
> > How did earth ever emerge from irreversible ice-age albedo feedback?
>
> I don't know how it happened, except that it happened on a time scale that was
> too slow for most complex species to wait out.

We've been switching between ice ages and interglacials and back again over about every hundred thousand years for the past couple of million years.

Most complex species have survived lots of such switches. Our genus has been around for a couple of million year and mitochondrial Eve lived about 155,000 years ago, so she was around in the interglacial before the last ice age, so we qualify.

> > Emotional guessing about control theory doesn't work.

Unless John Larkin is doing it.

> As somebody who claims to know about control theory you are familiar with time
> constants associated with feedback loops, and if the time constant is orders of
> magnitude too large for the task at hand the controller is worthless. The fact
> that your mains supply is controlled to deliver 60*3600*24 cycles per day
> doesn't make it suitable for a high-accuracy reference clock on a time scale of
> less than a day.
>
> > Positive feedback doesn't necessarily latch, but most people think it does.
>
> If positive feedback goes on for long enough you can consider it latched for
> all practical purposes. If we knew for a fact that without any CO2 limit the
> average temperatures would peak at +6°C in 200 years and be back at today's
> level in another 200 it should not make a difference for today's decision
> making at all.

There's not a lot of decision making going on at the moment. Lots of posturing, but the CO2 output keeps on rising.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (15 Aug 2022 09:29:36 GMT) it happened Robert Latest
<bobl...@yahoo.com> wrote in <jlui00...@mid.individual.net>:

>Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> We have currently no way to store that much energy,
>
>We don't need to. We need more flexible strategies for energy *consumption*.
>Everything nowadays is still based on the "base load + peak load" paradigm.
>
>> the climate and weather will create periods without sun (volcanic eruptions)
>
>Not everywhere at the same time.
>
>> and windmills will fly apart in decent storms
>
>They don't today, why should they in the future?

Well I remember seeing one of the blades on the ground after a storm when I drove by one here.

>> It is all about redundancy
>
>Correct.
>
>> The electric grid will break down again and again as it always does,
>
>If constructed cheaply wnd without regulatory oversight like in Texas, yes.
>
>> the solar panels will be blown of the roofs and land as happened many times.
>
>If constructed cheaply wnd without regulatory oversight like in Texas, yes.
>
>> How incredible stupid can you get >>> warming >>> needs >>> cooling
>
>Powered >>> by >>> energy >>> that >>> generates >>> more >>> warming,
>according to your ideas. Tell you what: Cooling is only needed when the sun
>shines. No electric energy storage necessary. Why not just slap solar cells
>onto those sprawling cardboard shacks that Arizonians call "single family

>homes" and keep them cooled to 60°F all day. It could be so easy. You don't
>even need a thermostat.

In theory yes,
You need a _lot_ of those cells, I just bought and tried a set of 350 W flex solar panels in my garden
have 250 Ah lifepo4 storage and a pure sine wave to 230 V 50 Hz converter, works perfectly!
Worked OK during the last power outage that lasted a few hours.

But cloudy skies .. not so much.. you need a LOT for washing machine, microwave, cooking plate, TV, radio,
charge phones, internet, monitors, lights, heating / cooling / tools .
Nuclear is the only thing that can be made big enough and steady / reliable enough to supply all that for all people.

Not even counting electric cars!!

I would like a small RTG, would work.
But then some clown would drill a hole in his.. radioactive contaminate his place.
Of course after WW3 everything glows anyways ...
But this fear for nuclear power is something put there by all that US war propaganda I'd think ;-)[1]
[1] yes I know.. ;-)

[Robert Latest]

rbowman wrote:
>> Pockets of humans may survive such
>> swings in some parts of the world, but not under conditions that I want to.
>>
>
> If the genetic Just So Stories can be believed, my ancestors chased the
> glaciers north after the last ice age and made a living hunting and
> gathering. They obviously survived although it might have been touch and
> go when the damn farmers arrived.

That's exactly what I meant. I don't give a rat's ass about long-term
biological survival of humans. They can go extinct for all I care. What I do
care about is the conditions under which I, my kids, and my (potential)
grandkids have to live. Some time between now and the Sun surning into a red
giant, humans will go extinct (first culturally, then biologically), and it
won't be pretty. I want that point in time to be as far removed from today as
possible.

[Robert Latest]

Anthony William Sloman wrote:
>
> That's nonsense. You just have to move your population further away from the
> equator.

"Just move" -- yeah right. Thousands od people from South America and Africa
are trying to "just move" further away from the equator right now, to North
America and Europe, for instance. Works really well.

>
>> This is not about long-term biological survival of a species, I'm not too
>> worried about that. I'm worried about the civilization(s) that makes all
>> the difference for this particlular species, and which incidentally is the
>> foundation of the very technology that you think will help us survive.

>V

> So a high technology energy intensive civilisation, which could run fine on
> solar cells, wind turbines and grid storage to cover the gaps when the sun
> isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing. It wouldn't run quite the same as
> the current arrangements, but it could be close enough

Of course. The technology is there. Some forms of energy consumption will
become permanently unfeasible. Problem is, today's political and financial
power has developed in the past decades and is therefore doing its damndest to
prevent any changes to the status quo (which is true for any system, anywhere).

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 9:20:02 PM UTC+10, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> On a sunny day (15 Aug 2022 09:29:36 GMT) it happened Robert Latest
> <bobl...@yahoo.com> wrote in <jlui00...@mid.individual.net>:
> >Jan Panteltje wrote:

<snip>

> >> and windmills will fly apart in decent storms
> >
> >They don't today, why should they in the future?
> Well I remember seeing one of the blades on the ground after a storm when I drove by one here.

One did once. They don't make a habit of it. The first gasoline powered cars broke down quite frequently, but they did improve the engineering.

> >> It is all about redundancy
> >
> >Correct.
> >
> >> The electric grid will break down again and again as it always does,
> >

> >If constructed cheaply without without regulatory oversight like in Texas, yes.

> >
> >> the solar panels will be blown of the roofs and land as happened many times.
> >
> >If constructed cheaply wnd without regulatory oversight like in Texas, yes.
> >
> >> How incredible stupid can you get >>> warming >>> needs >>> cooling
> >
> >Powered >>> by >>> energy >>> that >>> generates >>> more >>> warming,
> >according to your ideas. Tell you what: Cooling is only needed when the sun
> >shines. No electric energy storage necessary. Why not just slap solar cells
> >onto those sprawling cardboard shacks that Arizonians call "single family
> >homes" and keep them cooled to 60°F all day. It could be so easy. You don't
> >even need a thermostat.
>
> In theory yes,
> You need a _lot_ of those cells, I just bought and tried a set of 350 W flex solar panels in my garden
> have 250 Ah lifepo4 storage and a pure sine wave to 230 V 50 Hz converter, works perfectly!
> Worked OK during the last power outage that lasted a few hours.
>
> But cloudy skies .. not so much.. you need a LOT for washing machine, microwave, cooking plate, TV, radio,
> charge phones, internet, monitors, lights, heating / cooling / tools .
> Nuclear is the only thing that can be made big enough and steady / reliable enough to supply all that for all people.

What a load of rubbish. Solar farms can certainly be made big enough to power the entire grid. It would take up about 1% of the land area, which is a lot of land, but nothing like unattainable.

>
> Not even counting electric cars!!

They are expected to add about 30% to the current grid load. A lot of power, but nothing like unattainable.

> I would like a small RTG, would work.
> But then some clown would drill a hole in his.. radioactive contaminate his place.
> Of course after WW3 everything glows anyways ...
> But this fear for nuclear power is something put there by all that US war propaganda I'd think ;-)[1]
> [1] yes I know.. ;-)

Chernobyl had an effect. You should be old enough to remember that, though you don't seem to have grown up enough to have understood it.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

On 15 Aug 2022 09:49:30 GMT, Robert Latest <bobl...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>"Irreversible" in this context means: within the time frame of the existence
>>>of the human species, or human civilization as we know it. Which is maybe
>>>thousands of years (species) or decades (civilization). Earth has been
>>>swinging back and forth between more extreme conditions, but each time with
>>>what amounts to a complete overhaul of the biosphere. Pockets of humans may
>>>survive such swings in some parts of the world, but not under conditions that
>>>I want to.
>>
>> How did earth ever emerge from irreversible ice-age albedo feedback?
>
>I don't know how it happened, except that it happened on a time scale that was
>too slow for most complex species to wait out.
>
>> Emotional guessing about control theory doesn't work.
>
>As somebody who claims to know about control theory you are familiar with time
>constants associated with feedback loops, and if the time constant is orders of
>magnitude too large for the task at hand the controller is worthless. The fact
>that your mains supply is controlled to deliver 60*3600*24 cycles per day
>doesn't make it suitable for a high-accuracy reference clock on a time scale of
>less than a day.

I connected a good time-interval counter to the 60 Hz line. Most of
the time it displayed 16.666x milliseconds on single periods.

>
>> Positive feedback doesn't necessarily latch, but most people think it does.
>
>If positive feedback goes on for long enough you can consider it latched for
>all practical purposes.

Absurd. You can use positive feedback to double the gain of an
amplifier and it's perfectly stable.

Guessing about control theory doesn't work.

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 11:47:22 PM UTC+10, Robert Latest wrote:
> Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> >
> > That's nonsense. You just have to move your population further away from the
> > equator.
>

> "Just move" -- yeah right. Thousands of people from South America and Africa

> are trying to "just move" further away from the equator right now, to North
> America and Europe, for instance. Works really well.

Provides a lot of cheap labour in America. You don't even have to move them - they will pay people smugglers to do it for you.

We aren't talking about keep Trump supporters happy, but about keeping some sort of energy intensive civilsation going - which would probably involve culling a lot of Trump supporters anyway.

> >> This is not about long-term biological survival of a species, I'm not too
> >> worried about that. I'm worried about the civilization(s) that makes all

> >> the difference for this particular species, and which incidentally is the

> >> foundation of the very technology that you think will help us survive.
> >

> > So a high technology energy intensive civilisation, which could run fine on
> > solar cells, wind turbines and grid storage to cover the gaps when the sun
> > isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing. It wouldn't run quite the same as

> > the current arrangements, but it could be close enough.

>
> Of course. The technology is there. Some forms of energy consumption will
> become permanently unfeasible.

Name one. International jet flight may have to be cut back a lot until we can make some plumper looking jet aircraft that can fueled with liquid hydrogen, but we should be moving over to trains running at hundreds of miles an hour along evacuated transoceanic tunnels

> Problem is, today's political and financial
> power has developed in the past decades and is therefore doing its damndest to
> prevent any changes to the status quo (which is true for any system, anywhere).

There's a quite a bit of climate change denial propaganda around, but it is too dumb to persuade anybody sensible. John Larkin isn't all that sensible.

<snip>

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Robert Latest]

Jan Panteltje wrote:
>>> and windmills will fly apart in decent storms
>>
>>They don't today, why should they in the future?
>
> Well I remember seeing one of the blades on the ground after a storm when I
> drove by one here.

You saw a piece of technical equipment that failed? Unbelievable. Good thing
that can't happen with coal / nuclear.

>>Tell you what: Cooling is only needed when the sun shines. No electric energy
>>storage necessary. Why not just slap solar cells onto those sprawling
>>cardboard shacks that Arizonians call "single family homes" and keep them
>>cooled to 60°F all day. It could be so easy. You don't even need a
>>thermostat.
>

> But cloudy skies .. not so much.. you need a LOT for washing machine,
> microwave, cooking plate, TV, radio, charge phones, internet, monitors,
> lights, heating / cooling / tools .

For starters I was aiming for the lowest-hanging fruits there are: Air
conditioning in a sun-soaked desert in an affluent country. If we aren't
picking those, why bother with the complicated stuff? A one-person middle class
Texas household I know has about ten times the monthly electricity bill that I
have with a five-person household (300$ versus 30$). With energy prices about
half those of Germany, that household uses about 20 times my energy. Main
difference is A/C. Solar-powered A/C would go a looong way.

> Nuclear is the only thing that can be made big enough and steady / reliable
> enough to supply all that for all people.

Yeah super reliable. France has shut down half its thermoelectrical (nuclear)
power plants because the rivers are to warm / too low. When people in middle
Europe start installing A/C, that's not going to get better.

> Not even counting electric cars!!

Oh, those run completely emission-free, haven't you heard? Zero environment
impact during manufacture, operation, and disposal.

[Robert Latest]

Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> Most complex species have survived lots of such switches. Our genus has been
> around for a couple of million year and mitochondrial Eve lived about 155,000
> years ago, so she was around in the interglacial before the last ice age, so
> we qualify.

Like stated elsewhere, the survival of our genus doesn't worry me. Smaller
things than a climate crisis have brought down civilizations. I don't want
that.

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

On Mon, 15 Aug 2022 06:59:49 -0700, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com
wrote:

Actually, it works for a few people. Not many.

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 12:21:59 AM UTC+10, Robert Latest wrote:
> Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > Most complex species have survived lots of such switches. Our genus has been
> > around for a couple of million year and mitochondrial Eve lived about 155,000
> > years ago, so she was around in the interglacial before the last ice age, so
> > we qualify.
>
> Like stated elsewhere, the survival of our genus doesn't worry me.

It should.

> Smaller things than a climate crisis have brought down civilizations. I don't want that.

So work harder on persuading people to burn less fossil carbon for fuel.

If that happens it will change our civilisation, but not all that much, and we will still be able to use a lot of energy and look pretty much the way we do now.

Screwing up the global climate even worse than we have so far is a much more dicey proposition.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Robert Latest]

jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

> I connected a good time-interval counter to the 60 Hz line. Most of
> the time it displayed 16.666x milliseconds on single periods.

That's about as sound as making judgements about the climate by looking out the
window. Oh wait, you do that, too.

[Robert Latest]

Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 12:21:59 AM UTC+10, Robert Latest wrote:
>> Like stated elsewhere, the survival of our genus doesn't worry me.
>
> It should.

Why?

[Jan Panteltje]

Billy the CO2 kid wrote:
>don't seem to have grown up enough to have understood it.

I know!

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

On 15 Aug 2022 15:33:28 GMT, Robert Latest <bobl...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

I measured the local ac line period. No judgements were involved.

A simple lowpass or bandpass filter would take out the occasional
noise spike.

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Mon, 15 Aug 2022 07:32:59 -0700) it happened
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in
<h7mkfh98ho4mgicfn...@4ax.com>:

>>amplifier and it's perfectly stable.
>>
>>Guessing about control theory doesn't work.
>
>Actually, it works for a few people. Not many.

We are all control systems
picking up something and bringing it to your mouth
(food, joint, whatever)
Kicking a ball into a goal
And our brain does not use maaz
Just followed an interesting lecture on robotics with real examples on
ZDF-info Astra1
Nice channel, all day long science today with so many subjects.
There are a million control systems in your body.
If you have an open mind you can see and feel how those work.
Eye reflex ...


As to amplifier, you can increase Q of a tuned RF circuit by adding negative resistance
resulting in less bandwidth and more output.
above a certain level it will start oscillating.
(example tunnel diode oscillator)
There is also the super-regenerative receiver, oscillates, but it radiates.. positive feedback
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regenerative_circuit
old school

[rbowman]

On 08/15/2022 03:29 AM, Robert Latest wrote:
> Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> We have currently no way to store that much energy,
> We don't need to. We need more flexible strategies for energy *consumption*.
> Everything nowadays is still based on the "base load + peak load" paradigm.
>
>> the climate and weather will create periods without sun (volcanic eruptions)
> Not everywhere at the same time.
>
>> and windmills will fly apart in decent storms
> They don't today, why should they in the future?
>

https://nypost.com/2022/08/10/oklahoma-wind-turbine-bent-in-half-on-fire-in-wild-video/

Okay, so it didn't fly apart, it just bent in two places and caught
fire. That was last week...

[Fred Bloggs]

There're a bunch of videos of burning wind generators. It's usually caused by a failed subsystem, like the brakes. When the topmost unit burns up and parts fall off, the assembly becomes unbalanced and the whole thing flies apart. I suspect that's what happened in the video. You've got to watch for idiots with an agenda and their videos of just a small fraction of the whole story.

[Anthony William Sloman]

Other people care about their kids. They may not take kindly to actions on your part that threaten their long term survival.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Robert Latest]

Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 1:34:53 AM UTC+10, Robert Latest wrote:
>> Anthony William Sloman wrote:
>> > On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 12:21:59 AM UTC+10, Robert Latest wrote:
>> >> Like stated elsewhere, the survival of our genus doesn't worry me.
>> >
>> > It should.
>>
>> Why?
>
> Other people care about their kids. They may not take kindly to actions on
> your part that threaten their long term survival.

I care about my kids, potential grandkids, other family & friends and their
offspring, and humanity in general. I don't want them to suffer, and I don't
want to die believing that they will have to suffer. But since human life will
eventually die out, there will be generations of humans that suffer from
increasingly unliveable conditions. Question is, how far into the future do I
care? If humans make it until the sun explodes in a few billion years I'd count
that as a pretty good success, so I don't care. If it happens 20 years from
now, I'd be pretty upset. So somewhere between these two points in time I stop
caring. And I'm pretty sure "our genus" will make it that long. Maybe a few
preppers who haven't run out of ammo and diesel until then.

[Robert Latest]

I still fail to see how such a thing happening is an argument for Jan's
proposal that we can solve all our problems with technology. The most
interesting technology question in this context is, why did they take a video
when a still image would have sufficed? The only think moving is the windshield
wipers of the car that the video was shot from.

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 6:25:42 PM UTC+10, Robert Latest wrote:
> Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 1:34:53 AM UTC+10, Robert Latest wrote:
> >> Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> >> > On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 12:21:59 AM UTC+10, Robert Latest wrote:
> >> >> Like stated elsewhere, the survival of our genus doesn't worry me.
> >> >
> >> > It should.
> >>
> >> Why?
> >
> > Other people care about their kids. They may not take kindly to actions on
> > your part that threaten their long term survival.
> I care about my kids, potential grandkids, other family & friends and their
> offspring, and humanity in general. I don't want them to suffer, and I don't
> want to die believing that they will have to suffer. But since human life will
> eventually die out, there will be generations of humans that suffer from
> increasingly unliveable conditions.

Successful species do die out, but only because they split into different species who exploit different environments.

Humans are a successful social mammal - rather more than naked mole rats, who are another. The different environments we might successfully exploit could include other planets, so your point of view is rather narrower than it ought to be.

> Question is, how far into the future do I care? If humans make it until the sun explodes in a few billion years I'd count that as a pretty good success, so I don't care.

It's highly unlikely that any human descended species would look all that much like today's humans then. Physically we are well set up to be cursorial hunters, which isn't what most of us have been doing for the last few thousand years.

The sun isn't going to explode, it's just going to get progressively large, and surviving that would be an engineering problem. Boosting the earth into a higher orbit is a least a theoretically viable way that creatures like us could continue to survive through that.

> If it happens 20 years from now, I'd be pretty upset. So somewhere between these two points in time I stop
> caring. And I'm pretty sure "our genus" will make it that long. Maybe a few
> preppers who haven't run out of ammo and diesel until then.

I wouldn't pick preppers as likely long term survivors. Not enough imagination.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney